Community Structure and Seasonal Dynamics of Dactylogyrus spp. (Monogenea) on the Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) from the Salt Valley Watershed, Lancaster County, Nebraska

The gill monogene communities of Pimephales promelas (fathead minnow) in three distinct sites on converging streams were investigated from 2004 to 2006 in three different seasons. Thirty collections of P. promelas were made in southeastern Nebraska along three converging tributaries: Elk Creek (40.88534°N, 96.83366°W), West Oak Creek (40.9082°N, 96.81432°W), and Oak Creek (40.91402°N, 96.770583°W), Lancaster County, Nebraska. In all, 103 P. promelas were collected from Elk Creek, 115 from West Oak Creek, and 78 from Oak Creek and examined for gill monogenes. Among the P. promelas collected, 93.5% were infected with up to three species of Dactylogyrus, including Dactylogyrus simplex Mizelle, 1937, Dactylogyrus bychowskyi Mizelle, 1937, and Dactylogyrus pectenatus Mayes, 1977. Mean intensities at Elk Creek, West Oak Creek, and Oak Creek were 17.6, 22.8, and 25.1, and prevalences 88, 95, and 97%, respectively. At these three sites: (1) P. promelas does not share Dactylogyrus species with Semotilus atromaculatus (creek chub) or Notropis stramineus (sand shiner); (2) fish size and sex are not predictive of Dactylogyrus infection; (3) Dactylogyrus spp. vary (not always predictably) in their seasonal occurrence; (4) populations of Dactylogyrus spp. respond to environmental differences among sites; and (5) the community structure of Dactylogyrus spp. (order of abundance) is independent of environment.

Community structure and dynamics of Monogenea and Trematoda in three North American cyprinid species in the Salt Valley Watershed, Nebraska.

An investigation was made of the communities of gill monogene genus Dactylogyrus (Platyhelminthes, Monogenea) and the populations of blackspot parasite (Platyhelminthes, Trematoda) of Pimephales promelas, Notropis stramineus, and Semotilus atromaculatus in 3 distinct sites along the 3 converging tributaries in southeastern Nebraska from 2004 to 2006. This work constitutes the first multi-site, multi-year study of a complex community of Dactylogyrus spp. and their reproductive activities on native North American cyprinid species. The biological hypothesis that closely related species with direct lifecycles respond differently to shared environmental conditions was tested. It was revealed that in this system that, Cyprinid species do not share Dactylogyrus species, host size and sex are not predictive of infection, and Dactylogyrus community structure is stable, despite variation in seasonal occurrence and populations among sites. The biological hypothesis that closely related species have innate differences in reproductive activities that provide structure to their populations and influence their roles in the parasite community was tested. It was revealed that in this system, host size, sex, and collection site are not predictive of reproductive activities, that egg production is not always continuous and varies in duration among congeners, and that recruitment of larval Dactylogyrus is not continuous across parasites’ reproductive periods. Hatch timing and host availability, not reproductive timing, are the critical factors determining population dynamics of the gill monogenes in time and space. Lastly, the biological hypothesis that innate blackspot biology is responsible for parasite host-specificity, host recruitment strategies and parasite population structure was tested. Field collections revealed that for blackspot, host size, sex, and collection month and year are not predictive of infection, that parasite cysts survive winter, and that host movement is restricted among the 3 collection sites. Finally, experimental infections of hosts with cercaria isolated from 1st intermediate snail hosts reveal that cercarial biology, not environmental circumstances, are responsible for differences in infection among hosts.

Literacy Research: Issues of Authority, Ownership, and Representation

With the “social turn” of language in the past decade within English studies, ethnographic and teacher research methods increasingly have acquired legitimacy as a means of studying student literacy. And with this legitimacy, graduate students specializing in literacy and composition studies increasingly are being encouraged to use ethnographic and teacher research methods to study student literacy within classrooms. Yet few of the narratives produced from these studies discuss the problems that frequently arise when participant observers enter the classroom. Recently, some researchers have begun to interrogate the extent to which ethnographic and teacher research methods are able to construct and disseminate knowledge in empowering ways (Anderson & Irvine, 1993; Bishop, 1993; Fine, 1994; Fleischer. 1994; McLaren, 1992). While ethnographic and teacher research methods have oftentimes been touted as being more democratic and nonhierarchical than quantitative methods—-which oftentimes erase individuals lived experiences with numbers and statistical formulas—-researchers are just beginning to probe the ways that ethnographic and teacher research models can also be silencing, unreflective, and oppressive. Those who have begun to question the ethics of conducting, writing about, and disseminating knowledge in education have coined the term “critical” research, a rather vague and loose term that proposes a position of reflexivity and self-critique for all research methods, not just ethnography or teacher research. Drawing upon theories of feminist consciousness-raising, liberatory praxis, and community-action research, theories of critical research aim to involve researchers and participants in a highly participatory framework for constructing knowledge, an inquiry that seeks to question, disrupt, or intervene in the conditions under study for some socially transformative end. While critical research methods are always contingent upon the context being studied, in general they are undergirded by principles of non-hierarchical relations, participatory collaboration, problem-posing, dialogic inquiry, and multiple and multi-voiced interpretations. In distinguishing between critical and traditional ethnographic processes, for instance, Peter McLaren says that critical ethnography asks questions such as “[u]nder what conditions and to what ends do we. as educational researchers, enter into relations of cooperation. mutuality, and reciprocity with those who we research?” (p. 78) and “what social effects do you want your evaluations and understandings to have?” (p. 83). In»the same vein, Michelle Fine suggests that critical researchers must move beyond notions of the etic/emic dichotomy of researcher positionality in order to “probe how we are in relation with the contexts we study and with our informants, understanding that we are all multiple in those relations” (p. 72). Researchers in composition and literacy stud¬ies who endorse critical research methods, then, aim to enact some sort of positive transformative change in keeping with the needs and interests of the participants with whom they work.

AGRICULTURAL BIRD PROBLEMS IN THE SOUTHEAST

Our chairman has wisely asked that we not spend all of our time here telling each other about our bird problems. In the Southeast, our difficulties with blackbirds are based upon the same bird habits that cause trouble elsewhere: they flock, they roost and they eat, generally taking advantage of the readily available handouts that today's agricul¬tural practices provide. Those of us on the receiving end of these de¬predations of course think that damage in our own particular area must be far the worst, anywhere. Because of the location of our meeting place today, perhaps it is worthwhile to point out that a report prepared by our Bureau's Washington office this year outlined the problem of blackbird damage to corn in the Middle Atlantic States, the Great Lakes Region and in Florida, and then followed with this statement--"An equally serious problem occurs in rice and grain sorghum fields of Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas and Louisiana." The report also men¬tions that the largest winter concentrations of blackbirds are found in the lower Mississippi Valley. Our 1963-64 blackbird-starling survey showed 43 principal roosts totaling approximately 100 million of these birds in Virginia, the Carolinas, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee and Kentucky. We have our own birds during the summer plus the "tourist" birds from up here and elsewhere during the winter, and all of these birds must eat, so suffice it to say that we, too, have some bird problems in the Southeast. I'm sure you're more interested in what we're doing about them. To keep this in perspective also, please bear in mind that against the magnitude of these problems, our blackbird control research staff at Gainesville consists of 3 biologists, 1 biochemist and one technician. And unfortunately, none of us happens to be a miracle worker. I think, though, we have made great progress toward solving the bird problems in the Southeast for the man-hours that have been expended in this re¬search. My only suggestion to those who are impatient about not having more answers is that they examine the budget that has been set up for this work. Only then could we intelligently discuss what might be expected as a reasonable rate of research progress. When I think about what we have accomplished in a short span of time, with very small expenditure, I can assure you that I am very proud of our small research crew at Gainesville--and I say this quite sincerely. At the Gainesville station, we work under two general research approaches to the bird damage problem. These projects have been assigned to us. The first is research on management of birds, particularly blackbirds and starlings destructive to crops or in feedlots, and, secondly, the development and the adaptation of those chemical compounds found to be toxic to birds but relatively safe to mammals. These approaches both require laboratory and field work that is further subdivided into several specific research projects. Without describing the details of these now, I want to mention some of our recent results. From the results, I'm sure you will gather the general objectives and some of the procedures used.